Homeopathy

[Guest guest]

david, et al

I'm lost on this thread.

Are you saying that the same scientific system that says raw milk

will kill me and that coconut oil is bad for me is also saying that

homeopathy doesn't work?

Clear me up on this because I'm lost in the thread.

thanks -Allan

[Guest guest]

--- In , Allan Balliett <igg@i...>

wrote:

> david, et al

>

> I'm lost on this thread.

>

> Are you saying that the same scientific system that says raw milk

> will kill me and that coconut oil is bad for me is also saying that

> homeopathy doesn't work?

There is no properly and rigorously conducted science

indicating that raw milk will kill you or that coconut oil

is bad for you. We've come to the opposite conclusions,

I thought, precisely _because_ of the scientific evidence

to the contrary. Don't confuse the political and industrial

complex that oppresses us with the scientific establishment,

members of which occasionally whores themselves for the

former. Don't even confuse the scientific establishment

itself with science. Science is a proven method, but the

scientific establishment is a group of fallible humans who

often, but not always, properly use that method. Anybody

can put on a white lab coat and say that they're giving you

scientific facts. It's your own responsibility to learn

about the scientific method for yourself so you can judge

matters for yourself. All during the rise of the anti-raw-

milk movement, anti-cholesterol movement, etc. there have

been several scientists who have spoken up against it.

There are several scientific studies and experiments on

record that flatly contradict such notions. Have you read

'The Cholesterol Myths' by Uffe Ravnskov, MD, PhD? When

unscrupulous people are trying to control us by misrepresenting

themselves as scientific, there is all the greater urgency

that we all become scientifically literate. Furthermore,

it is only through becoming scientifically literate and

scientifically rigorous ourselves, that we can ever hope to

defeat the establishment.

On the other hand though, we often do, and properly may,

tentatively and provisionally accept the safety of certain

foods and practices when they have a very long history of

apparently safe use, and where there is no scientific

evidence contraindicating it. We have no choice. We

have to eat, and we have to proceed with our lives (this,

I think, is the basis, or at least the most sound part, of

Sally Fallon's book). However, that is quite a different

thing from flat out thumbing our noses at valid science,

or actually, reality itself. If we're going to do that,

then there's no difference between us and militant vegans,

or the anti-fat people, and we'd have no basis whatsoever

to say that they're wrong.

> Clear me up on this because I'm lost in the thread.

Are you cleared up? :-)

[Guest guest]

e:

>

>>

>> And a lot of things they THOUGHT were placebos, turned

>> out to be real.

>

>Like what? If they were thought to be placebos, it

>could only be because they tested as no more effective

>than a known placebo. If something's no more effective

>than a placebo, what makes you think it's not one? By

>the way, placebos and their effects _are_ " real " . In

>any case these comments bring to mind the quote from

><http://www.skeptic.com/03.1.jarvis-homeo.html>http://www.skeptic.com/03.1.jarv\

is-homeo.html .

Oh, I DO believe in the value of a good placebo! But most of

the ones assumed to be placebos simply weren't tested. A

good case of modern medicine is the case of antidepressents.

Most have a cure rate of about 30% -- which is about the same

as placebos. St. 's Wort -- and other herbs -- were assumed

to work as placebos, until the German gov't decided to test

a bunch of herbs as possibly cheaper things to prescribe

(since they have gov't funded healthcare, they were motivated).

Now antidepressants are VERY person specific, and what works

for one person doesn't work for another. So psychiatrists

typically try one after another until one works. When it

does work, was it a placebo, or was it " real " ? Since it is a " real "

medication, it is assumed to be " real " -- but actually the

evidence isn't much better than the evidence for any remedy

or a placebo. When you suffer with depression, and you

feel better, you tend to believe in whatever worked, but

you NEVER know that it was truly " real " or that your

mind didn't just suddenly change.

In my personal life, I didn't believe in " food reactions "

because most scientists didn't. Allergic reactions were

considered mentally induced for most of this

century, and food reactions are still thought by some

to be imaginary. I believed that too -- and lab tests

seemed to prove it. Parents thought their kids reacted

to X, Y, or Z -- but the kids were NOT allergic to those

foods according to tests, so they figured the parents

were just assuming food to be the problem. Now we know

there are FIVE different immune reactions, and they

were only testing for one.

Acupuncture is another case in point. Initial testing

indicated it was likely a placebo ... but now they are

finding real results for some acupoints, and likely because

of the way the brain is wired (you stimulate some neurons,

they stimulate their neightbors). They probably never will

find the elusive Chi, but acupuncture isn't just a placebo.

Yoga is another one. Now they find it DOES change the

body. How exactly no one knows, but it does have a

real relaxation effect. Also Buddhism really does change

the brain (at least in the monks that make a real practice

out of it) on MRI's.

After poohpoohing the allergy thing for years, now I'm in

the position of having to eat my words (and the

science is changing too). So I'm not about to poohpooh

yet another thing that is likely to be proven. Like

said, a scientist can never be an athiest, only an agnostic.

And yeah, the " Right thing for the wrong reasons " is classic.

Happens to a lot of scientists too -- like, the statin drugs that

lower cholesterol also happen to be an anti-inflammatory,

and it is the anti-inflammatory part that seems to work.

It's all " whatever works " -- if a pill makes your dog better,

and it makes your friend's dog better, and the vet starts

using it and it makes dogs better, then it works. If it makes

you better, cool. Glucosamine was originally prescribed

by vets for dogs, for no better reason than " it worked " and

still no one knows exactly why it works.

Just as doing these right practices for the

>wrong reasons did not validate the faulty theories upon

>which they were based, neither will the success of a

> " homeopathic " remedy comprehensively validate homeopathy's

>theory, pharmacology, and metaphysics. "

Probably it won't validate the theory, if it does turn out it

works. Almost always when there is a " weird " result,

the theory turns out to be bogus (in science too). Often

a new branch of science results!

> " Curiously, the lack of good evidence of effectiveness of

>homeopathic remedies may be irrelevant to supporters of

>homeopathy. One leading advocate asserts that proving the

>effectiveness of homeopathy through scientific research is

>not important and suggests that personal experience is more

>important that any number of carefully controlled studies.45

>Positive expectations and beliefs of patients and healers

>have historically resulted in reports of excellent or good

>outcomes in more than 70 per cent of cases even though the

>treatments given are now known to have been worthless.46 "

Not at all. If there is no evidence of course I don't support it.

And I don't " support " it now. I just think it is dangerous to

come out against something when a lot of people get good

results from it. Lab tests ARE worthless in many, many instances --

I'm not trying to be illogically defensive (as in the Randi quote)

but when I have 20 friends that all swear by something that

hasn't been tested in a lab, my friends are usually right. They

try a LOT of stuff that doesn't work, and they drop it fast.

The lab results usually catch up in 10 years or so, in my

life so far.

My friends have also gone through a lot of phases and fads

that DON'T work. I'd say about 10% of the illogical stuff

ends up to REALLY WORK (for reasons I don't understand).

So they are all experimenting with stuff -- it's like one of

those computer simulations where you have a zillion

subroutines randomly trying things, and the ones with

success get points, and other routines adopt the successful

results and further randomize them. All these random

silly people are coming up with good results, free testing!

>Like with what? Maybe you're wrong and it _was_ a placebo

>effect or hysteria. I'm afraid that you've made your own

>subjective impressions an absolute measure against which

>all else is to be judged.

No, I don't mean MY impressions. I mean that the lab rats

justified the results years later, as with the examples I gave

earlier. Allergies, yoga, acupuncture, the idea brain problems

can be food based --- there have been a lot of them I can't

remember just at the moment. Like I said, I think 90% of

the crazy ideas ARE crazy ideas, but about 10% are not, and

I like keeping an open mind because just about all the

GOOD ideas began at the " lunatic fringe " .

You can also wait for lab proof, if you want, but sometimes

that puts you 20 years behind a good " real " solution that

might help.

There is a great theory about how paradigm shifts work.

When an old paradigm isn't working a LOT of new ideas

are tried, most of which don't work. The folks who believe

in the current paradigm attack ALL the new ideas, and

the " bleeding edgers " try out the new ideas. Eventually

a few of the new ideas take over, because they work,

and they become the new paradigm. I like to look at all

the new ideas and suspend judgement, and occasionally

jump in and become a bleeding edger if the downside

risk isn't too high. Not having a lab, I may never know

what percent was placebo and what was real, but usually

the placebo effect wears off (lab studies are too short

for THAT effect).

>But it _has_ been tested, again and again, and has

>never proved any more effective than placebos. In fact

>I referrenced _several_ reports of such testing in

>my other post, and there are many more that I didn't

>include. You really need to check into them if you're

>under such a misapprehension.

You are right, I'd have to check all the studies to make any

definitive judgement. Like I said, I'm NOT making any

judgements ... I've never used any such remedies and I

don't have time to study it. I just said I'm keeping an

open mind, and a lot of intelligent people are.

>> Except the ones making homeopathic medicine, who are not

>> likely to be believed. But it seems to work for a lot of

>> people, and shoot, it is a lot less harmful that Prilosec.

>

>People are replacing more than just Prilosec with it.

>Whatever that is.

Prilosec is the medicine that has been " proven " -- in many lab

studies -- to help heartburn. Problem is, in the long run, it

kills your digestion because you NEED high stomach acid

to digest your food. It makes a ton of money, and people

who understand digestion are concerned about all the Prilosec

popping. People are popping the stuff like candy, and it will

get worse now that it is non-prescription.

Now Biogest, one of those things that probably has NOT

been tested in a lab, really does cure the problem (getting

the stomach sphincter to close) according to my stomach

and those of several people I know. It isn't homeopathic,

but it has all the problems you suggest. If a homeopathic

remedy somehow causes the stomach to react by secreting

more of the right stuff, that might work too, I don't know.

But NOTHING I could suggest would be as harmful

as the Scientifically Proven Doctor Approved Prilosec!

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 10/19/03 5:30:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time,

lierrekeith@... writes:

> >>>>>Look up your drug of choice in the PDR. For 90%

> of the medicines used by allopaths the cause of action

> is " unknown. " Yet no one calls those drugs

> unscientific.

Lierre,

I wasn't calling homeopathy unscientific and I don't think a drug can be

" scientific " or " unscientific, " but I'm quite sure that are people who often

accuse the FDA of approving drugs without the scientific basis, etc.

I don't know much about the history of homeopathy but I do recall you or

someone else talking about the double-blind studies, etc on this list before now

that you mention it.

Chris

[Guest guest]

>

There's no reason to cater to the 'placebo' concept with homeopathy.

Anyone who has used it with children knows how effective it can be

with young, simple, systems. More to the point, homeopathy is used

extensively in animal care, being a primary medicinal tool in most

organic dairies because it brings about rapid cures and does not

taint the milk.

In my humble opinion, The paragraph below is an appropriate statement

from someone who lives with a homeopath, but shouldn't be taken too

seriously by anyone interested in self-medicating minor ailments with

store bought remedies. It is the case that this is 'symptom

treatment,' which is not at all what homeopath is or pretends to be

(the whole person needs to be treated.) on the other hand, so many

ailments are manifestations of the same conditions that it IS

practical to take a remedy to deal with a problem. Rhus Tox for

poiseon ivy is a prime example, arnica for a potentially bruising

situation, calendula tincture (homeopathic) for diaper rash, and so

on. I, myself, have never successfully treated more complicated

ailments with homeopathy, for example, I've never cured something as

common as the simple cold.

I agree that the best way to understand how effective homeopathy can

be is to use it or to use it with your children.

One should always be aware that the scientific method is set up to

prove the Cartesian world. Homeopathy, biodynamics and many other

working practial approaches to improving human health operate outside

of the cartesian model, which, by definition, makes them non-provable

(by that methodology). The failure to prove is not a reason to deny

our own experience, however.

-Allan

> That said, it doesn't work on every condition. And

>the so-called remedies that you get at the natural

>food store are basically bullshit. *The remedy has to

>be matched to the individual's symptoms*. There isn't

>one remedy for hayfever or diarrhea or headaches.

>There's potentially thousands. It's a completely

>different method of prescribing. So those little

>bottles you can buy at Wholefoods labeled " for sore

>throats " or whatever are probably not going to work

>and make classical homeopaths crazy.

>Lierre

[Guest guest]

>>In my humble opinion, The paragraph below is an appropriate statement

>from someone who lives with a homeopath, but shouldn't be taken too

>seriously by anyone interested in self-medicating minor ailments with

>store bought remedies. It is the case that this is 'symptom

>treatment,' which is not at all what homeopath is or pretends to be

>(the whole person needs to be treated.) on the other hand, so many

>ailments are manifestations of the same conditions that it IS

>practical to take a remedy to deal with a problem.

Allan,

It's not difficult to self-treat in first-aid situations, using the

store-bought remedies, as long as you use a good book on homeopathic

self-treatment (or two) and completely disregard the indications on the

remedy labels. But the single remedies from the health food store are still

useful if you know how to use them.

The combination remedies which say they're for " sore throats " and such, are

low-potency remedies that usually don't work deeply enough to be effective.

They contain a bunch of possible remedies.. you throw them all against the

wall and hope something sticks :-).. Sometimes they can be better than

nothing, for those who don't have any reference books to help make a more

precise selection.

For more complicated acute problems, such as childhood diseases, flu, etc.,

a course in homeopathic prescribing can train you in the basics of

prescribing for those (there's a great one online, BTW), but for any sort

of chronic problem, a homeopath with many years of experience is the way to go.

Homeopathic methodology is so different from the allopathic model, as you

say, that many of the experiences people have with homeopathy " not working "

can be attributed to people not knowing how to use it correctly.

And even when an experienced homeopath is working on a case, it can take

time for the case to be sorted out and the correct remedy or remedies

selected, and for the case to run its course. Many people give up during

healing crises which are part of the healing process, and which a homeopath

can recognize as such, but it can be discouraging for someone who's

expecting amelioration of their symptoms in a certain timeframe.

So although homeopathy can certain provide palliation of symptoms and help

people feel better while they're going through a deeper healing process,

the whole notion of what works is somewhat different from the allopathic

model of taking a pill and getting relief.

-

[Guest guest]

At 05:12 AM 10/19/2003, you wrote:

>> >>>>>Look up your drug of choice in the PDR. For 90%

>> of the medicines used by allopaths the cause of action

>> is " unknown. " Yet no one calls those drugs

>> unscientific.

[Guest guest]

Some doctors prescribe drugs based on what is " anecdotal "

too. I've had a couple -- " well, this isn't designed for this

use, but I've found it works for a lot of patients so if

you want to try it ... " . If enough patients get healed, they

might publish a paper on it and do a study. They really

DON'T know why a lot of drugs work. One process that

was described to me by a participant was, they induced

a condition and then tried one drug after another against

it. When they found one that worked, they wrote it up!

And it is now prescribed.

A lot of this debate is " debate by ridicule " or " the Mad Magazine

approach " , i.e., " wow, isn't this a stupid idea! " rather than

actual PROOF. I did read 's links but I didn't find

one that was an actual study, though some had some humor

and some argued the physics of the thing (and no one doubts

that the physics of homeopathy, if true, don't fit our standard

physics model, which is what started the conversation).

Actually the physics of homeopathy relate, I think, to this

Prill water -- which some people swear by. It could be

a placebo, or it could be some weirdness in the water.

When you get into quantum physics, you get into stuff

like the probability that some atoms pop in and out

of this space and paired electron spins, and some scientists

believe our nervous system works partly on a quantum

level, and THEN things get really, really weird.

And mostly not tested, though they DID test the paired electron

thing and it works. You take a pair of paired electrons.

Move one 50 miles away. Reverse the spin on the first one.

The second flips IMMEDIATELY. As predicted by math (???).

How weird is that? Einstein called it " hocus pocus " and wouldn't

accept it, but now they tested it (I can't imagine how, but the

physics community believes it). And they are beginning

to seriously believe that matter might pop in and out of

existence, and are working on building " quantum computers "

that compute all possibilities at the same time.

So in a universe like this one, yeah, I'm not ruling out

that water has memory!

-- Heidi (who hasn't run any study on homeopathy).

>> >>>>>Look up your drug of choice in the PDR. For 90%

>> of the medicines used by allopaths the cause of action

>> is " unknown. " Yet no one calls those drugs

>> unscientific.

[Guest guest]

Heidi,

Along those lines, the funniest thing I ever heard.. in " A Language Older

than Words " by Derrick Jensen, at one point he's talking about experiments

with plants, putting electrodes on them and measuring their reactions to

things. Okay, not -too- strange, yet. Until you get to the yogurt.

So you put electrodes on the yogurt, actually two samples of yogurt, and

not much happens until you put an antibiotic in one, and the other one goes

nuts.

Then there were the experiments in which white cells were taken from

peoples' mouths and the electrical activity of the white cells were

monitored. Now, the white cells are somewhere outside of the person's body.

Even so, when the person has an emotional response, the white cells go

nuts. And faked emotions don't work; white cells only respond to genuine

emotions, apparently :-)

As strange as life is, I think it's probably even stranger.

-

>And mostly not tested, though they DID test the paired electron

>thing and it works. You take a pair of paired electrons.

>Move one 50 miles away. Reverse the spin on the first one.

>The second flips IMMEDIATELY. As predicted by math (???).

>How weird is that? Einstein called it " hocus pocus " and wouldn't

>accept it, but now they tested it (I can't imagine how, but the

>physics community believes it). And they are beginning

>to seriously believe that matter might pop in and out of

>existence, and are working on building " quantum computers "

>that compute all possibilities at the same time.

>

>So in a universe like this one, yeah, I'm not ruling out

>that water has memory!

>

>-- Heidi (who hasn't run any study on homeopathy).

[Guest guest]

> And

> the so-called remedies that you get at the natural

> food store are basically bullshit. *The remedy has to

> be matched to the individual's symptoms*.

I have a full toolkit of remedies and some prescribing guides, and I

try to match the remedy to the symptoms as best I can. I would agree

that buying a remedy in the store because it says it's for sore throats

or whatever isn't likely to be effective unless you're lucky or easily

placebo'ed.

That said: Homeopathy is ONE of my tools. One of the main objections to

homeopathy seems to be that it " leads people astray " and keeps them

from potentially life-saving conventional treatments. You could say

that about *any* treatment, conventional or otherwise, let alone

homeopathy. As someone who has suffered greatly and nearly died at the

hands of allopaths (and also received excellent care from

allopaths--it's all in the individual doctor regardless of orientation)

I look at all modalities with a jaundiced eye and use whatever works;

if it doesn't work, out it goes. For instance, chiropractic works well

for me on muscle and some joint pain, but has no effect on much of

anything else for me. So I use it for what works but I don't depend on

it for general health care.

For basic home health care, like sprains, fevers, upset tummies,

teething (Hyland's teething tablets were a godsend), headaches, insect

stings and so on, homeopathy is one of my standard tools because for

WHATEVER reason it works. And if I pick the wrong remedy it's not

likely to kill anyone.

Lynn S.

-----

Lynn Siprelle * Writer, Mother, Programmer, Fiber Artisan

The New Homemaker: http://www.newhomemaker.com/

Siprelle & Associates: http://www.siprelle.com/

People-Powered ! http://www.deanforamerica.com/

[Guest guest]

You know, that IS weird, and I've been hearing some similar

issues from pretty conservative sources. Like, they now think

that pathogenic bacteria are fairly benign until they

reach a critical mass in the body -- then they attack. But the

can't figure out HOW they know how many bacteria are

present. Some kind of signalling, but seemingly not chemical?

Or if it is chemical it is in incredibly minute traces.

Yeah, I agree, it probably IS even stranger!!!!

-- Heidi

>Then there were the experiments in which white cells were taken from

>peoples' mouths and the electrical activity of the white cells were

>monitored. Now, the white cells are somewhere outside of the person's body.

>Even so, when the person has an emotional response, the white cells go

>nuts. And faked emotions don't work; white cells only respond to genuine

>emotions, apparently :-)

>

>As strange as life is, I think it's probably even stranger.

>

>-

>

[Guest guest]

--- <karenr@...> wrote: >

Then

> I switched to a

> different practitioner and a different form of

> homeopathy, which is now

> having quite profound positive effects.

Hi

What were the different forms of homeopathy? I am

getting quite positive effects from my treatment, but

the endometrial cyst is still there, despite the

positive effects. Therefore, I am not getting cured

(as fast as I would like). Perhaps I need to find a

new practitioner too.

Jo

________________________________________________________________________

Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

Messenger http://mail.messenger..co.uk

[Guest guest]

At 10:02 PM 10/21/2003 +0100, you wrote:

>Hi

>

>What were the different forms of homeopathy? I am

>getting quite positive effects from my treatment, but

>the endometrial cyst is still there, despite the

>positive effects. Therefore, I am not getting cured

>(as fast as I would like). Perhaps I need to find a

>new practitioner too.

>

>Jo

When l went to my homeopath a dozen years ago for an ovarian cyst she

referred me to an acupuncturist. She said she'd found that the most

effective treatment. It was imo. Hasn't recurred.

Wanita

[Guest guest]

Hi Jo,

>What were the different forms of homeopathy? I am

>getting quite positive effects from my treatment, but

>the endometrial cyst is still there, despite the

>positive effects. Therefore, I am not getting cured

>(as fast as I would like). Perhaps I need to find a

>new practitioner too.

Well, the course of healing can go from the mental/emotional level first,

to the physical last. So if you're feeling better in general in the

mental/emotional realm, often it's just a matter of time before the

benefits manifest physically. Your homeopath can give you more feedback on

how he/she thinks your treatment is progressing, and whether you just need

more time with the treatment plan you're already on.

That said, classical homeopathy (I assume that's what you're doing?) can

sometimes be limited for certain people, especially in more complicated

cases where the person has had a lot of allopathic drugs in the past, or

many traumas and other factors that can make the symptom picture fuzzier

and the treatment strategy more difficult for a homeopath. For me, there

were just too many of these " obstacles to cure " which muddied the symptom

picture and made it very difficult to prescribe for me.

Other methodologies have really only sprung up in the last 10-20 years. The

one I'm working with now is called Heilkunst and is practiced by the

Hahnemann Center Clinic in Ottawa (I do phone consults). It's more about

the timing of remedies, giving remedies in a certain sequence, and that has

worked around the obstacles I encountered before.

This is based on the work of Dr. Elmiger of France, author of

" Rediscovering Real Medicine " (www.jelmiger.com) and furthered by Rudi

Verspoor of Canada. It's all grounded in Hahnemann's original work on

homeopathy.

The website for the Hahnemann Clinic is www.homeopathy.com/clinic and for

more technical articles, www.heilkunst.com

There are also other systems, but overall I don't see great successes with

those in practice.

If you're still interested in Heilkunst after poking around the websites,

email me privately and we can talk more.

Take care,

[Guest guest]

Jo,

Just a P.S. to my last post.. often it can help to get a " second opinion "

from a colleage of your current homeopath, to take a fresh look. A

homeopath who's been on a case for a long time may not be seeing it clearly

anymore.

-

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 19:34:51 -0400

<karenr@...> wrote:

>Back in the 80's I used homeopathy for about eight solid years, believing

>in it so much that I kept persevering with trial and error through many

>different remedy choices even though it wasn't helping me. The reason I

>persevered was because I was having definite reactions to the remedies,

>although nothing curative, but quite dramatic effects that showed that the

>remedies were active and not just sugar pills. Then I switched to a

>different practitioner and a different form of homeopathy, which is now

>having quite profound positive effects.

>

>-

,

Just how is this different form of homeopathy affecting you?

The Secret of Health

Stay away from the doctor, says Hein, MD.

http://tinyurl.com/td64

[Guest guest]

,

>Just how is this different form of homeopathy affecting you?

Well, in brief.. quite profoundly. In the past year since I started this

treatment, I feel like I made a major mental/emotional life transition. I'm

perimenopausal, and all women go through that physically, but digesting the

experience is quite another thing! My whole outlook has shifted.

It's also had more of a positive impact on my emotional life than

psychotherapy ever did. (Would take a lot more 'splainin' to flesh that one

out!).

Also my chronic migraines which I had to medicate with triptan drugs

several times a week just to function at all, disappeared. All the other

things I'd been doing (diet, supplements, etc.) had never been able to

touch that.

I still have some issues that haven't responded yet, but the progress I've

already made indicates a positive course, and I expect to see more good

results in time. I've had some rather perversely stubborn health problems

for many years and a very complicated health history, so I'm not surprised

this is taking time. I'm glad I've finally figured out the difference

between being patient with something that's not working but sounds so good

ideologically, and being patient with something that actually IS working :-)

-

[Guest guest]

Hello:

I do use homeopathy for different reasons. My whole family uses it. I have

several books on it. I feel it does help, but like everything it is not a

perfect answer to pain.

[Guest guest]

Introduction Homeopathy is based on the principle that substances that are poisonous in large doses can be very beneficial in small doses. Homeopathy is a form of medicine that treats the body as a whole and helps it to heal itself. It can be used for the short term (acute) illnesses and long term (chronic) illnesses. The objective is to prevent the patient from getting the illnesses again (prevention). The name homeopathy comes from the Greek word "homios" which means "like" and the word "pathos" meaning "suffering". Thus homeopathy simply means treating like with like. In the fourth century B.C., Hippocrates,

the father of modern medicine, observed that large amount of certain natural substances can produce symptoms in healthy people resembling those caused by the disease, while smaller doses of these same substances can relieve those symptoms. in 1790's Hahnemann, a German doctor, amplified this concept and proposed the practice called homeopathy. He proposed that "Let like be cured by like". Homeopathy uses animal, vegetable and mineral preparations to cure a person's illness. Millions of people in Britain, Europe and America uses Homeopathy. Homeopathy looks at each patient and develops a remedy or treatment plan strictly for him or her. It invokes the powers of healing inherent in individuals (our immune system) to develop a successful therapy. The more one knows about the patient, the symptoms, likes and dislikes, what makes them better or worse, it helps in developing a "symptom picture" of the patient that can lead to a

successful treatment. If we think about the principle of homeopathy, it has a lot in common with our present understanding of immunizations. To prevent us from catching small pox, a vaccine is prepared which is a mild form of the virus that causes the disease. The principle is that introduction of this small amount of the virus in our body system will set out our body's defenses so that when the actual virus shows up, our body will have enough barriers or fighting power to prevent the virus from entering our body. Homeopathy practitioners believe that when we introduce a very very small amount of the deadly material into the body, our body will unleash enough defenses to prevent the disease from recurring again. However, there are significant differences between the concepts used in Western medicine and those of homeopathy. Vaccines are not rendered more potent when they are diluted like homeopathic preparations. In conventional

treatment, there is a minimum dosage that need to be given before the medication becomes effective in treating the underlying problem. For example, when taking antibiotics, we have to take the whole course at regular intervals to maintain a potency level in the bloodstream to kill the bacteria. Homeopathic remedies, which are made from naturally occurring plant, animal, or mineral substances, are recognized and regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and are manufactured by established pharmaceutical companies under strict guidelines. There are over 2000 homeopathic remedies that are usually referred to by their abbreviated name. (For example Arg nit. stands for Argentum nitricum). These are derived from such exotic sources as bee stings, snake venoms, arsenic, gold and silica, and even compounds from diseases tissue. Homeopaths also prescribes tissue salts. Tissue salts are prepared from mineral sources. Homeopathic

remedies are diluted to such an extent that there can be no possible side effects from even the most toxic substances. The dilution process is known as 'potentation' Taken in this ultra diluted form, Homeopathic remedies have no side effects and are perfectly safe, non-toxic and non-addictive. Next Topic: Abbreviations Used By Homeopaths and How Homeopathic Medicines are Prepared [Homeopathy Home][Alternative Therapies Home][Holistic-online.com Home] http://www.holisticonline.com/Homeopathy/homeo_intr.htm

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

[Guest guest]

This is wonderful,I hope you keep this line going..

Marty

--- michele horton <epifany97523@...> wrote:

> Introduction

> Homeopathy is based on the principle that

> substances that are poisonous in large doses can be

> very beneficial in small doses. Homeopathy is a form

> of medicine that treats the body as a whole and

> helps it to heal itself. It can be used for the

> short term (acute) illnesses and long term (chronic)

> illnesses. The objective is to prevent the patient

> from getting the illnesses again (prevention). The

> name homeopathy comes from the Greek word " homios "

> which means " like " and the word " pathos " meaning

> " suffering " . Thus homeopathy simply means treating

> like with like.

> In the fourth century B.C., Hippocrates, the

> father of modern medicine, observed that large

> amount of certain natural substances can produce

> symptoms in healthy people resembling those caused

> by the disease, while smaller doses of these same

> substances can relieve those symptoms. in 1790's

> Hahnemann, a German doctor, amplified this

> concept and proposed the practice called homeopathy.

> He proposed that " Let like be cured by like " .

> Homeopathy uses animal, vegetable and mineral

> preparations to cure a person's illness. Millions of

> people in Britain, Europe and America uses

> Homeopathy.

> Homeopathy looks at each patient and develops a

> remedy or treatment plan strictly for him or her. It

> invokes the powers of healing inherent in

> individuals (our immune system) to develop a

> successful therapy. The more one knows about the

> patient, the symptoms, likes and dislikes, what

> makes them better or worse, it helps in developing a

> " symptom picture " of the patient that can lead to a

> successful treatment.

> If we think about the principle of homeopathy, it

> has a lot in common with our present understanding

> of immunizations. To prevent us from catching small

> pox, a vaccine is prepared which is a mild form of

> the virus that causes the disease. The principle is

> that introduction of this small amount of the virus

> in our body system will set out our body's defenses

> so that when the actual virus shows up, our body

> will have enough barriers or fighting power to

> prevent the virus from entering our body. Homeopathy

> practitioners believe that when we introduce a very

> very small amount of the deadly material into the

> body, our body will unleash enough defenses to

> prevent the disease from recurring again. However,

> there are significant differences between the

> concepts used in Western medicine and those of

> homeopathy. Vaccines are not rendered more potent

> when they are diluted like homeopathic preparations.

> In conventional treatment, there is a minimum dosage

> that need to be given before

> the medication becomes effective in treating the

> underlying problem. For example, when taking

> antibiotics, we have to take the whole course at

> regular intervals to maintain a potency level in the

> bloodstream to kill the bacteria.

> Homeopathic remedies, which are made from

> naturally occurring plant, animal, or mineral

> substances, are recognized and regulated by the Food

> and Drug Administration (FDA) and are manufactured

> by established pharmaceutical companies under strict

> guidelines. There are over 2000 homeopathic remedies

> that are usually referred to by their abbreviated

> name. (For example Arg nit. stands for Argentum

> nitricum). These are derived from such exotic

> sources as bee stings, snake venoms, arsenic, gold

> and silica, and even compounds from diseases tissue.

> Homeopaths also prescribes tissue salts. Tissue

> salts are prepared from mineral sources. Homeopathic

> remedies are diluted to such an extent that there

> can be no possible side effects from even the most

> toxic substances. The dilution process is known as

> 'potentation' Taken in this ultra diluted form,

> Homeopathic remedies have no side effects and are

> perfectly safe, non-toxic and non-addictive.

> Next Topic: Abbreviations Used By Homeopaths and

> How Homeopathic Medicines are Prepared

> [Homeopathy Home][Alternative Therapies

> Home][Holistic-online.com Home]

>

>

>

http://www.holisticonline.com/Homeopathy/homeo_intr.htm

>

>

> ---------------------------------

> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with

> Mobile. Try it now.

Spiritual freedom is my birthright.

I am a free thinker. I am able to rise above mental

prejudices and stereotypes of others.

I am a free thinker. Nobody and nothing can manipulate

me or deceive me.

I am a free thinker. I freely choose truth and love.

Today, I embrace a greater degree of spiritual

freedom.

________________________________________________________________________________\

____

Never miss a thing. Make your home page.

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

thank you Marty, glad you enjoyed!Marty Cline <stompingelk@...> wrote: This is wonderful,I hope you keep this line going..Marty--- michele horton <epifany97523 > wrote:> Introduction> Homeopathy is based on the principle that> substances that are poisonous in large doses can be> very beneficial in small doses. Homeopathy is a form> of medicine that treats the body as

a whole and> helps it to heal itself. It can be used for the> short term (acute) illnesses and long term (chronic)> illnesses. The objective is to prevent the patient> from getting the illnesses again (prevention). The> name homeopathy comes from the Greek word "homios"> which means "like" and the word "pathos" meaning> "suffering". Thus homeopathy simply means treating> like with like.> In the fourth century B.C., Hippocrates, the> father of modern medicine, observed that large> amount of certain natural substances can produce> symptoms in healthy people resembling those caused> by the disease, while smaller doses of these same> substances can relieve those symptoms. in 1790's> Hahnemann, a German doctor, amplified this> concept and proposed the practice called homeopathy.> He proposed that "Let like be cured by like".> Homeopathy uses

animal, vegetable and mineral> preparations to cure a person's illness. Millions of> people in Britain, Europe and America uses> Homeopathy.> Homeopathy looks at each patient and develops a> remedy or treatment plan strictly for him or her. It> invokes the powers of healing inherent in> individuals (our immune system) to develop a> successful therapy. The more one knows about the> patient, the symptoms, likes and dislikes, what> makes them better or worse, it helps in developing a> "symptom picture" of the patient that can lead to a> successful treatment.> If we think about the principle of homeopathy, it> has a lot in common with our present understanding> of immunizations. To prevent us from catching small> pox, a vaccine is prepared which is a mild form of> the virus that causes the disease. The principle is> that introduction of this small

amount of the virus> in our body system will set out our body's defenses> so that when the actual virus shows up, our body> will have enough barriers or fighting power to> prevent the virus from entering our body. Homeopathy> practitioners believe that when we introduce a very> very small amount of the deadly material into the> body, our body will unleash enough defenses to> prevent the disease from recurring again. However,> there are significant differences between the> concepts used in Western medicine and those of> homeopathy. Vaccines are not rendered more potent> when they are diluted like homeopathic preparations.> In conventional treatment, there is a minimum dosage> that need to be given before> the medication becomes effective in treating the> underlying problem. For example, when taking> antibiotics, we have to take the whole course at>

regular intervals to maintain a potency level in the> bloodstream to kill the bacteria.> Homeopathic remedies, which are made from> naturally occurring plant, animal, or mineral> substances, are recognized and regulated by the Food> and Drug Administration (FDA) and are manufactured> by established pharmaceutical companies under strict> guidelines. There are over 2000 homeopathic remedies> that are usually referred to by their abbreviated> name. (For example Arg nit. stands for Argentum> nitricum). These are derived from such exotic> sources as bee stings, snake venoms, arsenic, gold> and silica, and even compounds from diseases tissue.> Homeopaths also prescribes tissue salts. Tissue> salts are prepared from mineral sources. Homeopathic> remedies are diluted to such an extent that there> can be no possible side effects from even the most> toxic

substances. The dilution process is known as> 'potentation' Taken in this ultra diluted form,> Homeopathic remedies have no side effects and are> perfectly safe, non-toxic and non-addictive.> Next Topic: Abbreviations Used By Homeopaths and> How Homeopathic Medicines are Prepared> [Homeopathy Home][Alternative Therapies> Home][Holistic-online.com Home]> > >http://www.holisticonline.com/Homeopathy/homeo_intr.htm> > > ---------------------------------> Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with> Mobile. Try it now.Spiritual freedom is my birthright. I am a free thinker. I am able to rise above mentalprejudices and stereotypes of others. I am a free thinker. Nobody and nothing can manipulateme or deceive me. I am a

free thinker. I freely choose truth and love. Today, I embrace a greater degree of spiritualfreedom.__________________________________________________________Never miss a thing. Make your home page. http://www./r/hs

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.